Alandail, an extremely intelligent, thoughtful club member has been trying to engage the moderators in conversation about compatibility for Mac users for months...as soon as they announced the Musicology store.

The last thing I remember was one of the PPs saying something like "We wouldn't leave anyone out."

Apparently, many Mac users are still unable to play the WMA files, and since there is no alternative format, they therefore can't hear the songs, period. At least, not legally.

Even if they are able to play the files on their Mac, there is no legal way to burn them to a CD or transfer them to any other device, such as an iPod or an mp3 player.

Of course it's possible, because circumventing the Digital Rights Management (which for the non-techies is what controls when and where you can listen to the track) is so easy it's absurd. Certainly anyone who would pay for these files with the intent of illegally spreading them on the internet would take the 2 seconds that it requires to rip the audio CD tracks to mp3 on a computer or make AIFF files out of the originals on a Mac and then burn THOSE as audio tracks. It's easier than it sounds, trust us.

Over on Da Club, Alandail posted the following, and it got me thinking about the topic, and I wanted to start a conversation about it over here, since I'm not allowed in there. At least, not legally.

And I should say that I have absolutely no problem breaking the law - in fact, I find it quite sexy. But some people have morals, and I would like to know the moderators' interpretation of the club rules in this regard...is it okay for Mac users to circumvent the DRM? Is it okay for Windows users to rip mp3s of their audio CDs in order to put them on a portable player they use?

****


Alandail (NOT me) said:


[This message was edited Wed Mar 31 17:53:15 2004 by theblueangel]

as a mac user, I'm a little upset that they don't offer different file types that would work on my computer better. BUT, i have had NO problems downloading the songs, and then tranfering them to Itunes and then burning them to a CD so far... there are ways to do it, and it's really not that hard... maybe a little time consuming since you have to re-record them into another file using audio hijack. BUT, you know you're gonna listen to each track anyways... so wqhy not re-record them when you do like I did. Of course, it is unfair for those Mac users who don't use OSX, but I say... OH WELL!!! OSX has been around for 3 or 4 YEARS now! if you ain't got it, then you ain't a true macintosh lover anyways and it's time for you to upgrade or get a new computer!! OS9 is DEAD! Get over it!

everyone who believes they should correctly address the needs of Mac users and not require us to break the law - support Musicology on the iTunes store. While it's technically trivial to do so, there are plenty of people who will never figure it out and will just be frustrated, and it is illegal. The single is up now - I expect that means the album will be up there soon. The single is currently the #14 best selling pop track at the iTunes store. Show them there is a considerable amount of incremental revenue selling on the service that has 70% of the legal music downloads.

http://phobos.apple.com/W...Id=6393813

I really don't see a valid argument against putting all of the music up on the iTunes store - and I don't get the members at the club who spend time arguing against choice. It is a complementary market that generates incremental revenue. Mac owners, iPod owners, and people who prefer the iTunes juke box. None of these are properly addressed by the current club offerings. It also gets casual music fans who see Prince on the best seller list and check the track out and buy it who would never think to even look for an NPGMC store. It's incremental enough that when the album is up, iTunes royalties will likely exceed NPGMC download revenues.

What I find quite discouraging about the time I've spent trying to get this issue addressed, I have not had one direct response to anything I've said from any of the moderators. And I've had threads moved to less relevant and lower volume forums. They even moved a thread someone else posted about the single being at the iTunes store. You would think if they want the complaining to stop, they would want people to know about the alternative, even if it's just for the single right now (while the WMA based walmart has the whole album). And i had the insulting comment from the moderators about this very issue that I posted on the other thread here. They think the people who are not served by their service are the problem - the post implies they'd rather we went away than actually fix the problem. Here's the link:

http://www.prince.org/msg/13/87262

I think if the PPs simply acknowledged the situation and gave some validation to your concerns, it would save a whole lot of mess all around.

But unfortunately, the world doesn't work that way....

theblueangel said:

It's also illegal to tape shows off the television. I find people complaing about the fine legality of it a little dull. And I'm sure the PP mods agree as do the NPGMC. If you buy the tracks and burn them to a CD for your own use, that's okay. Just don't share them.

Atreus said:

It's not illegal to tape shows off of television. It is illegal to buy or sell shows taped off of television. There is a difference.

It is illegal to convert DRM protected files in to files without DRM protection. It doesn't matter if the NPGMC moderators tell you to do so, it's still illegal. If they want you to covert the files to bypass the DRM protection, thus break the law, whey don't they instead offer files without the DRM protection. That way we don't have to break the law, and we end up with the same thing - a file that has no DRM protection.

look at it this way. Prince once released a track on Napster. Yet people using services like Napster to share music were sued by the RIAA. It would not help their defense to go to court and say Prince said it was okay for me to break this law. It's not just illegal to circumvent the DRM, it's illegal to own software designed to do so. it doesn't matter if you only used the software because NPGMC said to do so, which they haven't done, and I would be totally shocked if they do recommend that a a solution.

btw: Musicology is up to #11 at the apple store.

make that #9 now

I have a mac osx. Yesterday I tried all day to hear the npgmc sample. Nothing works.
After some hours I decide to download legally the not-usable wma musicology album, and search a mp3 version using a p2p program.

Well, I downloaded a mp3 version in some minutes from a p2p, and after I try 3 times to download the legal wma file... I gave 3 time my credit card number and 3 times the NPGMC site give me an error, 'cause -the site says- I have just buyed it, so I can not buy it again, and look the email to have more information.
In the email: nothing.

So now I don't know if I lose 30$, or nothing, and I have not a legal not-usable wma file...

Why I can have easly a p2p mp3 of musicology file when I WANT TO BUY the legal file, as I ever payed the last mp3 prince sells some years ago?

I think there are many problems in npgmc tecnical staff, and I do not think is a good idea keep the macintosh users out the club, using the real bad software called wmp.

f.


ps: no, itunes store is not the answer. Here in Italy the is not (still) a legal way to buy using itunes store.

Everything works absolutely perfectly with a mac now.

It didn't at first but this was more to do with a weird mac set up then anything else.

I'm running a G5 with OS 10.3.3 and managed to download everything perfectly. Burning to a CD is slightly trickier i must admit - but managed to do that fine now and the ipod is happy

For those mac users who are having trouble - the important thing is to make sure Internet Ex. is your default browser. To ensure it is - you must go into Safari (!) and set it up through preferences in there.

Sorted.

I am on a MAC G4, 10.3.3 running Panther. I've downloaded a file, and whenever I try to play it, IE pops up and says it can't find a license, and to click on a link that will verify my purchase. I'll do that, then it will tell me that "U have been authorized to receive a DRM license 2 play this file.
Before u can play the file, u must close this window by clicking Cancel below". Of course, there's no place to click...the sceeen is blank except got the text I just copied.

So if any of you MAC wizards know whats going on, please help. Or maybe you can make a CD for me and I'll pay ya.
[This message was edited Thu Apr 1 5:41:17 2004 by idas]

idas said:

Open WMP again, go to open, select the file. Chances are it'll close again and go to IE with a "You are now authorised. Click play" type message. Now, go back to WMP, open it. From file, open the .wma file and it should work..... in theory. It took a few attempts for me but all is working now.

try this - buy the track at the iTunes store and see how smoothly it works - then post feedback at the u tell us forum at NPGMC and detail how different the experiences are.

Why can't MAC users install Windows Media Player 9.0 on their computers? All the video files from year one were Apple MOV files and I had to install Quick Time on my Windows machine.

CynthiasSocks said:

The problem is - Microsoft decided to not allow Windows Media Player 9.0 for the Mac burn CDs. There's no legal way to get the file off of the Mac and onto a stereo or in a car. There also is no legal way to listen to the music from iTunes, which is what all mac users and many windows users use for their jukebox program.

When Apple makes cross platform tools like quicktime or iTunes, they make sure it works equally well on other platforms. Microsoft, on the other hand, will cripple the implementation on other platforms. There is no technical reason at all why they couldn't support burning CDs from Windows Media Player. It would have taken a day or two to program, but it's not Microsoft's agenda to do so. Another problem is the implementation forces Mac users who all use the Safari browser to download and install Internet Explorer to get the songs to work.

The club wants members to switch their browser to one that doesn't work as well, switch their jukebox program to one that doesn't work as well, and abandon their iPod and forget their stereo in order to listen to a couple of CDs of music.

And the thing is, from the reports from the club, even many Windows users have trouble getting this to work correctly. These are people using a Micorosoft browser, a microsoft media player, a microsoft OS and downloading music from a store created with Microsoft's instant music store software. Microsoft can't even make that work smoothly for everyone. I've never heard of these kinds of problems with the iTunes store, even for windows users. In fact, had the iTunes store had the same sorts of problems that the NPGMC store is having, it would have failed.

The latest I heard is that the NPGMC is hiring more tech support people. The best tech support is to use technology that works instead of forcing poorly designed technology on people.

Bottom line right now: If you're on a Mac using OS X, you CAN purchase, download and play the music from the club. You cannot burn the music to a CD to listen in places where most people listen to music (the car or on a home stereo), because WMP 9 for Mac OS X won't burn CDs. And, whether you're on a Mac or a PC, you can't move the music that you purchased to ANY portable digital audio player, iPod or otherwise. This is all proof that the club does not really understand how many of its members listen to and catalog their music library.

Anxiety said:

POOK THINK IF THEY JUST SELL FREAKING CD

WE NOT HAVE PROBLEM AT ALL

theblueangel said:

I guess what really strikes me is the issue of paranoia. It's true that the people who are interested in these tracks are people who have already given Prince a gazillion dollars and who are now going to the trouble to buy the tracks from him rather than downloading them free from p2p. Just freakin' sell mp3 downloads! It's not like the files aren't already on p2p anyway, so why not permit a good experience for those who actually pay for the files? Dammit! AND they should be made available in iTunes, since that is such an elegant way to buy music for those of us who live in the US.

I think that a monkey could do a better job of running that joint. Pook? Interested?


[This message was edited Tue Apr 6 9:48:34 2004 by tackam]

gimme $3000 to buy a new protools002 system, and I'll start using 0sX!

HornyPony said:

And now, to beat a horse that, if not dead, is certainly in mortal danger of losing its life.





The infamous Mr. Igot's thoughts...

http://www.latext.com/pm/...ogue/P985/

Prince's Musicology store, licensed WMA files, and Apple's iTunes Music Store [Macintosh]

As a long-time Prince fan, I am obviously excited by the prospect of being able to purchase new music directly from the artist's own web site. The Musicology music store has now become a reality. (In previous years, membership of the NPG Music Club did give you access to a number of music file downloads, but it was a subscription-based model and not a store. Most of these files are now available as album downloads to those who weren't subscribers through the store, which is also accessible to non-subscribers.)

As a Mac user, however, I am obviously disappointed that the store is based on Microsoft's proprietary Windows Media Audio licensing technology. This has already led to rather heated debates between Windows and Mac users on the Club's member forums. To the Club's credit, they have taken pains to explain the rationale [membership required] behind their choice of technology, and I am afraid that it makes sense for them at this point in time.

In a nutshell, the problem is that Apple's own licensed AAC file format (used for music files sold through the iTunes Music Store) is just as proprietary as Microsoft's licensed WMA format. And the difference between the two, from the perspective of the independent artist, is that Microsoft allows third-parties to use the technology to develop their own music store. If you want to use Apple's licensed file format, however, your only choice, as an independent artist, is to sign a contract with Apple to sell your music through their iTunes Music Store. You cannot set up your own independent store.

It is quite understandable that, as an independent artist who has long fought to free himself from contractual (and unfair) obligations with major record labels, Prince is not particularly interested in Apple's approach. Obviously Apple takes a significant cut on each and every sale. Of course, Apple needs to cover the costs of setting up and maintaining the iTunes Music Store and, by signing with them, the artist doesn't need to cover the cost of setting up and maintaining a web store himself. But this system obviously creates a dependence -- and the same old problems that artists have had to endure with major record labels during the last century are still present: there is a "middleman" that takes a cut, you have to go through this middleman to sell your music, the middleman has some control over how your work is presented and made accessible, etc.

The bottom-line is that, if Apple really wants to compete with Microsoft, it needs to make the licensed AAC file format technology available to third-parties so that they can set up their own music store independently from the iTunes Music Store. Otherwise, independent artists such as Prince will tend to use Microsoft's technology instead, and it will become the de facto standard.

For Mac users, the problem is compounded by the fact that Microsoft's support for the WMA format on the Mac is so poor. You can play licensed WMA files with the Windows Media Player (version 9, for Mac OS X only), but you cannot burn them on CD or transfer them to a portable music device. In addition, the Windows Media Player for Mac OS X does not support file names longer than 31 characters, which creates all kinds of problems for Mac users who are not aware of the limitation. (The ".wma" suffix gets truncated if the file name is too long, etc.) Finally, in the case of the licensed WMA files from Prince's Musicology store, the way the license to play the files is acquired is very buggy. You are forced to set Explorer as your default browser, and even then, you'll have to go through two application crashes before you can actually play the files properly.

In addition, Microsoft makes no mystery of the fact that it won't bother to provide better support. The Read Me file for the Windows Media Player for Mac OS X states quite clearly:

Although it is usually possible to play protected files by using Windows Media Player 9 Series for Mac OS X, in some cases you may encounter one of the following issues:

- The Player displays the error message "Cannot open the file. Verify that the path and file name are correct and try again." In this case, verifying the path and file name will not solve the problem.

- A Web page is displayed that informs you that you should upgrade to a newer version of the Player. In this case, you already have the latest version of Windows Media Player for Mac OS X, so upgrading will not solve the problem. In both cases, there is no way to resolve the issue, and you won't be able to play the file.
Nice.

And in the case of WMA files that do work, if you want to really enjoy the music by putting on a CD, you actually have to "cheat" and use a third-party piece of software such as Rogue Amoeba's Audio Hijack Pro to capture the sound stream as you are playing it and save it in a more Mac-friendly format -- even though you own perfectly legal copies of the song files.

In other words, right now playing music files such as the ones sold through Prince's Musicology store is a royal pain in the neck for Mac users -- but the blame is shared between Microsoft and their poor Mac support and Apple for not making the licensed AAC technology available to independent artists. Since we can't really count on Microsoft to reverse this trend (they have little interest in improving the experience for Mac users), the ball is in Apple's park. If they don't do anything, the AAC technology and the iTunes model will end up being marginalized like the Mac platform itself, no matter how many iPods Apple sells.

In order to survive in the digital age, Apple's technology needs to be not just user-friendly, but also creator-friendly -- i.e. artist-friendly. (Of course, this doesn't address the core issue behind all these difficulties, i.e. whether any form of digital copy protection is effective again piracy and can provide the adequate balance between user-friendliness and creator-friendliness...)

Posted by: Pierre Igot on Apr 06, 04 | 4:53 pm (AST)


the ever so inevitable edit...
[This message was edited Thu Apr 8 16:35:26 2004 by Universaluv]

I agree with mr. Igot.


f.

I don't see the AAC format going away, especially inside the iTunes Music Store.

PC users can play AAC files through the PC iTunes. Mac has accomodated PC users, it's just not true the other way around . . .

Mr.

Igot said:

Sorry, but that's not "cheating". It's willfully and knowingly breaking the law (the DMCA) risking yourself to absurd penalties the music industry itself asked for with this awful law. Do we really need to break the law and risk jail or huge fines just to be able to listen to music?


The ball isn't in Apple's court, it's in Prince's royal court. They can simply make the songs available on MP3 and all troubles will be gone in no time. So what if MP3 can't be protected by DRM? DRM only causes a lot of hassle and frustration with paying customers and the music is STILL for grabs at the filesharing networks.

Want some advice? Save yourself the time and trouble caused by the technical and legal problems and become TRULY free, instead of relying on MICROSOFT- out of all parties- to "protect" your music.




That is the discussion that people really should be having, but mr. Igot and the NPGMC are dodging it.


--
[This message was edited Thu Apr 8 15:21:49 2004 by Abrazo]